KANYALUR JITENDRA Vs. N S KALANDAR BASHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings in P.R.C. No.49/2001 on the file of the learned II Additional Judicial I Class Magistrate, Madanapalle.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of the present petition in brief are as follows. Petitioner No.2 filed a report with I Town Police, Madanapalle, on 25.8.2000 at 4.10 p.m., alleging that when he was going from the bar room to the car of petitioner No.5 on that day, 1st respondent, armed with a knife, abused Advocates in a filthy language and tried to attack petitioner No.5 who managed to escape from the attack, that then 1 st respondent pounced upon petitioner No.2 and beat him on his right wrist, and that some Advocates came there and prevented 1st respondent from attacking further. That report was registered as crime No. 132/2000. The police after investigation filed a charge-sheet under Sections 326 and 506 IPC against 1st respondent and his son-in-law. On the same day at 4.30 p.m., 1st respondent too lodged a complaint with the same police against petitioners 1 to 9 and 10 others alleging that when he went to the Court at Madanapalle on 25.8.2000 to observe the Court proceedings in connection with a complaint lodged by his daughter in C.C. No.472/2000 against eight Advocates including petitioners 1, 5, 8, 12 and 16 to 18 and another, petitioners 1 to 5 dragged him to the Bar Association, and all the petitioners beat him with chappals, sticks and stones, resulting in bleeding injuries and dumb injuries all over his body. Petitioners 6 and 7 caught hold of the hands of the 1st respondent and when petitioner No.4 tried to stab him with a knife, he somehow managed to ward off the stab, but in the process received a bleeding injury on his forehead. Petitioners asked 1st respondent to advise his daughter to withdraw the case against them. Since 1st respondent did not agree to do so, he was attacked as aforesaid. That report was registered as crime No. 133/2000. The police after investigation filed a final report stating that it was a mistake of fact. Subsequently, 1st respondent filed a private complaint before the learned II Additional Judicial I Class Magistrate, Madanapalle, against all the petitioners with the same allegations, which he made in his report to the police. The complaint was registered as P.R.C. No.49/2001 under Sections 326, 447, 506 and 147 read with Section 34 IPC against all the petitioners and under Section 307 IPC against petitioners 4, 5 and 7. Accused in the complaint filed the petition to quash the proceedings.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that the report lodged by 2nd petitioner was earlier in point of time, that 1 st respondent filed the report with the police only as counter blast and though it was referred as mistake of fact, he yet chose to file the private complaint implicating petitioners 10 to 18 also who were not named in the report filed earlier by him, and that allowing to continue the proceedings in the private complaint is only abuse of process of the Court since it was filed to wreak vengeance against the petitioners. Learned Counsel tor the petitioners relied upon a decision in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604, and contended that the proceedings should be quashed. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the petition.